On May 11, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bernd Dorn wrote:
On 11.05.2007, at 17:29, Chris Withers wrote:

Fred Drake wrote:
On 5/11/07, Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I dunno, do we actually need an "offical big zope 3 release"
anymore?
No.  What's more, we don't even want to use one anymore.
cool :-)

My only slight concern here is when people make changes in one
satellite project, they break another one and don't realise. But I
guess the buildbot should catch that, right?

i talked with jim about this and we agreed in that specifying
versions in eggs is not a good idea. The best way imho is to use
buildout's 'version' section in your application's buildout to nail
down all eggs to a specific version.

- -1;  a "meta" egg would work fine as a place to specify hard-wired
dependencies.   Not every Zope3 user is going to be using buildout.
Note that such a "mega-egg" would likely specify the "transitive
closure" of its dependency graph, as well.

Whether such a mega-egg is called an "official Zope release" is a
different issue, but that would be one way to let folks download a
"known good" integration (a distribution?) of the various satellite
projects.

A meta egg is another alternative.

Note that for individual applications that *do* use buildout, it is often more convenient to use buildout versions rather than meta-egg dependencies.


+1 for avoiding gratuitous version-specific dependencies in "library"
eggs;  unless there is a known incompatibility, eggs should specify
their dependencies by name.

Or often with a minimum version.

Jim

--
Jim Fulton                      mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]                Python 
Powered!
CTO                             (540) 361-1714                  
http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation        http://www.zope.com             http://www.zope.org



_______________________________________________
Zope3-dev mailing list
Zope3-dev@zope.org
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to